Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

Reports of protests are overblown. A few incidents around the country, but nothing major.

5 (45.5%)

A few major incidents in capitals, but nothing much in DC.

5 (45.5%)

A major incident in DC, but nothing much around the country.

0 (0%)

More than 10 capitals have major upheavals, but nothing much in DC.

0 (0%)

A major incident in DC plus more than 10 capitals with significant upheavals.

1 (9.1%)

More than half the capitals around the country have problems with protesters, but DC is quiet.

0 (0%)

DC has major problems, while more than half the capitals around the country also have considerable trouble with protesters.

0 (0%)

Huge disruption to the day.

0 (0%)

Total Members Voted: 9

Voting closed: January 19, 2021, 10:49:21 PM

[kiidcarter8]

What on earth would Republicans be worried about?

Go ahead.  Lay it out for us.

[josh]

Kamala Harris tweeted after the results were in last year in the Virginia Gubernatorial race that
"Thank Goodness that Virginia has been preserved from racism by Ralph Northam!"
Harris was among the first of the democrat Presidential hopefuls to throw Northam under the bus when the year book pictures became public.
Is there any evidence that Northam has, in any way, demonstrated racism in his adult life?
Just asking.

And if the democrats are so strong about giving convicted felons another shot at society, from voting rights on up, how do they square that with telling Northam to take a hike for a 35 year old year book photo?

He was an adult when that picture appeared. And he gets to keep voting. What is your point, other than the opposite of what your criticism would be if Harris HADN'T called for his resignation?

I suppose, to some, it is gratifying that a politician who won an election by falsely playing a race card is now about to be hoist on his own petard. And democrats are rightly  derided for the messy bed of identity politics they now squirm in.  But this is another example of politics run amok and a further reminder that without a change in course there will be no decent people willing to serve in public office.

"a politician who won an election by falsely playing a race card is now about to be hoist on his own petard"

Oh, is Trump being hoist on that petard, too?

Meanwhile, keep ignoring your racist party, like you always do.

Amoral hypocrite.

Why do you ask Republicans to defend every member of their party?  And seldom take the time to make a case for your guy.

1) The case for the Dems has been made repeatedly - you just choose to ignore it.

2) You and your spend plenty of time attacking ours, while ignoring the wrong-doing of your own, especially your president and his administration.

3) Every member of a party that acts as yours has acted has the choice to stay silent or to speak up against it or to actively support it. The VAST majority of your party seems inclined to support it. Therefore I would ask you not to DEFEND them, but to repudiate them.

Just as I would ask the Dems to repudiate crap by their officials and leaders and donors, etc.

Sometimes, being opposed to what is going on is what is called for in the party that is out of power.

The Trump administration has kidnapped children - thousands of them - and continues to strive to avoid returning them to their families, whining about what a burden it puts on them, about how they think it may be impossible.

And you? You ask THIS dumbass question?!

Amoral hypocrite.

[josh]

Australia's a man's country!

https://www.radionz.co.nz/news/world/381696/australia-turns-away-women-fleeing-from-saudi-arabia

More like a border-secure country...where floodgates are not welcome.

Four Corners has evidence of at least two young Saudi women who arrived at Sydney Airport in the past two years but were turned back after making their asylum claims clear to Australian officials.
Four Corners has also been told that Saudi women who arrive alone at Australian airports are being questioned as to why they are travelling without a male guardian.

At least 80 Saudi women have sought asylum in Australia in recent years, many of them fleeing Saudi Arabia's oppressive male guardianship laws, which allow their husbands, fathers, brothers, uncles and even sons to strictly control their lives.

Four Corners has spoken to several Saudi women who managed to escape the Middle Eastern kingdom and make it to Australia. All of them remain on bridging visas waiting for their asylum claims to be processed.

Way to prove the point.

If Saudi WOMEN are being excluded, that has nothing to do with floodgates, misogynist.

Oh yes it does.
First a few, then a few more, and before you know it the trickle has become a flood.

No, you woman-hater.

If they let the men in and not independent women, if they question the women asking where their men are, then this has nothing to do with floodgates and everything to do with sexism.

But you wouldn't know anything about that, would you?

Don't see any Saudi men flying in and seeking asylum in Australia.

That woman boss of facebook said in her speech that care would need to be taken with the 'me-too' type allegations against men...because some women would be lying.

Didn't read too carefully, did you?

[NeedsAdjustments]

What on earth would Republicans be worried about?

Go ahead.  Lay it out for us.

You tell me.  What are Republicans worried about?  That they are worried is incontrovertible.

As you can't seem to figure out how to get past the least secure paywall out there, after being told multiple times how, here is what the Washington Post piece had to say about it:

But let’s be clear about one thing: There has never before in American history been a president for whom it was more important that his tax returns be opened to scrutiny.

Unlike previous presidents, Trump not only held on to his business interests after he took office, he has made clear that he expects everyone from members of his party to foreign governments to put money in his pocket by patronizing those businesses. He has an extraordinary record of creating grifts and swindles to separate the gullible and desperate from their money, from Trump University to the Trump Network to the Trump Institute. His foundation was revealed to be essentially a scam, and he was forced to shut it down.

Perhaps most incredibly, an extensively documented investigation revealed four months ago that Trump and his family planned and executed an absolutely massive tax fraud scheme during the 1990s that defrauded the federal government of hundreds of millions of dollars. Were it not for the statute of limitations, he would probably be facing prosecution for it.

The things in Trump's past are appalling enough, but it's his current debts and business interests that we really need to understand. Trump himself obviously can't be relied on to inform us of any conflicts of interest he might have; just look at how often he lied about Russia, claiming to have no business interests there when in fact during the campaign he was pursuing a deal to build a Trump Tower in Moscow that could have netted him hundreds of millions of dollars.

Republicans are as aware of all this as Democrats are. They know who the president is. If they actually believed that Trump's returns would show him to be a man of unimpeachable integrity who had committed no wrongdoing, they'd be perfectly happy to have the public see them. But we all know that's not what the returns will show.

[josh]

https://theintercept.com/2019/02/05/republicans-immigrants-crimes/

Emphasize crimes done by immigrants.

Deemphasize crimes done by people born here.

In other words, stir up bigotry.

No surprise there.

Again, we don't ask you to defend them. We ask you to repudiate them

We have no expectations that you will, however.

[REDSTATEWARD]

I want to be clear that I've never asked a Republican to defend Trump.   His actions are indefensible.  Including withholding his tax returns...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/02/05/we-may-finally-see-trumps-tax-returns-republicans-are-panicking/?utm_term=.8188779ecf93

I can't imagine anything Trump would want more than a full-fledged-democrat-led attack on his privacy rights.
Given the low esteem Americans give the IRS(thanks Obama) I bet he is rooting for that fight.

"Privacy Rights?"  LOL.  Every President (even nominees) over the last 40 years has released their tax returns.  There is a well-established precedent that recognizes the public's right to know who has been paying their President.

No. There is not. There is no right to know anyone's IRS information, including any President's.  Any tax returns made public by Presidents have been voluntary. 

And of course, while running Trump didn't have an argument about his "privacy rights" when he said he would release his returns just as soon as the IRS is done with their audit.  That turned out to be a straight up lie.

So what is Trump hiding?  REDSTATEWARD doesn't care.  Follow the party line, no matter how corrupt the "President" is.

So don't vote for him.  I didn't.  (but it had nothing to do with his tax returns)
As I said earlier Americans will not take kindly to an invasion of privacy, even if it involves Donald Trump. You might want to think about that.

[NeedsAdjustments]

I want to be clear that I've never asked a Republican to defend Trump.   His actions are indefensible.  Including withholding his tax returns...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/02/05/we-may-finally-see-trumps-tax-returns-republicans-are-panicking/?utm_term=.8188779ecf93

I can't imagine anything Trump would want more than a full-fledged-democrat-led attack on his privacy rights.
Given the low esteem Americans give the IRS(thanks Obama) I bet he is rooting for that fight.

"Privacy Rights?"  LOL.  Every President (even nominees) over the last 40 years has released their tax returns.  There is a well-established precedent that recognizes the public's right to know who has been paying their President.

No. There is not. There is no right to know anyone's IRS information, including any President's.  Any tax returns made public by Presidents have been voluntary. 

And of course, while running Trump didn't have an argument about his "privacy rights" when he said he would release his returns just as soon as the IRS is done with their audit.  That turned out to be a straight up lie.

So what is Trump hiding?  REDSTATEWARD doesn't care.  Follow the party line, no matter how corrupt the "President" is.

So don't vote for him.  I didn't.  (but it had nothing to do with his tax returns)
As I said earlier Americans will not take kindly to an invasion of privacy, even if it involves Donald Trump. You might want to think about that.

That you think this is a PR fight Trump will win, with a large majority of Americans supporting the Mueller investigation, with ongoing investigations into his inauguration and golf clubs, the Trump Foundation getting shuttered, and with the indictments of close Trump associates sure to continue, is downright hilarious.

Even Trump's people know they aren't going to win that fight.  They only hope to delay it past November 2020.

And once again...you have no interest why.  You buy into the Republican's view that it would be damaging to him, but don't think the public has a right to see them.  That you don't see the contradiction there is unsurprising.  That you would have no problem seeing that contradiction if we were talking about Hilary Clinton goes without saying.

[REDSTATEWARD]

3) Every member of a party that acts as yours has acted has the choice to stay silent or to speak up against it or to actively support it. The VAST majority of your party seems inclined to support it. Therefore I would ask you not to DEFEND them, but to repudiate them.

The Senate voted Monday to oppose the withdrawal of U.S. troops from Syria and Afghanistan, breaking with President Donald Trump as he calls for a military drawdown in those countries.
Senators voted 70-26 for the amendment sponsored by Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell. The measure says the Islamic State group and al-Qaida militants still pose a serious threat to the United States, and it warns that “a precipitous withdrawal” of U.S. forces from those countries could “allow terrorists to regroup, destabilize critical regions and create vacuums that could be filled by Iran or Russia.”
So.
PresidentTrump intends to stop waging war even though many of his country’s legislators and even some of his own staff think he should continue.
Got that?

[NeedsAdjustments]

Among polled registered voters, 63 percent say that House Democratic leadership in the next session of Congress should be allowed to publicize the president's tax returns, while 37 percent say it shouldn't.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/thehill.com/homenews/administration/419498-majority-of-americans-believe-house-dems-should-release-trumps-tax%3famp

But of course this is before the public heard Trump’s convincing argument to his “right to privacy.”

Lol.

[REDSTATEWARD]

I want to be clear that I've never asked a Republican to defend Trump.   His actions are indefensible.  Including withholding his tax returns...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/02/05/we-may-finally-see-trumps-tax-returns-republicans-are-panicking/?utm_term=.8188779ecf93

I can't imagine anything Trump would want more than a full-fledged-democrat-led attack on his privacy rights.
Given the low esteem Americans give the IRS(thanks Obama) I bet he is rooting for that fight.

"Privacy Rights?"  LOL.  Every President (even nominees) over the last 40 years has released their tax returns.  There is a well-established precedent that recognizes the public's right to know who has been paying their President.

No. There is not. There is no right to know anyone's IRS information, including any President's.  Any tax returns made public by Presidents have been voluntary. 

And of course, while running Trump didn't have an argument about his "privacy rights" when he said he would release his returns just as soon as the IRS is done with their audit.  That turned out to be a straight up lie.

So what is Trump hiding?  REDSTATEWARD doesn't care.  Follow the party line, no matter how corrupt the "President" is.

So don't vote for him.  I didn't.  (but it had nothing to do with his tax returns)
As I said earlier Americans will not take kindly to an invasion of privacy, even if it involves Donald Trump. You might want to think about that.

That you think this is a PR fight Trump will win, with a large majority of Americans supporting the Mueller investigation

*****NON SEQUITUR ALERT!

, with ongoing investigations into his inauguration and golf clubs,

NON SEQUITUR ALERT *2

the Trump Foundation getting shuttered, and with the indictments of close Trump associates sure to continue,

NON SEQUITUR ALERT #3

  is downright hilarious.

You certainly are.

Even Trump's people know they aren't going to win that fight.  They only hope to delay it past November 2020.

There is no legal fight to lose.Your argument has no standing.

And once again...you have no interest why.  You buy into the Republican's view that it would be damaging to him, but don't think the public has a right to see them.  That you don't see the contradiction there is unsurprising.  That you would have no problem seeing that contradiction if we were talking about Hilary Clinton goes without saying.

Hillary released her IRS files.

[REDSTATEWARD]

Among polled registered voters, 63 percent say that House Democratic leadership in the next session of Congress should be allowed to publicize the president's tax returns, while 37 percent say it shouldn't.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/thehill.com/homenews/administration/419498-majority-of-americans-believe-house-dems-should-release-trumps-tax%3famp

Less than the poll before Trump was elected in 2016.
Do you ever have a edge beyond the axe you grind?

[REDSTATEWARD]

By the way, NEEDS, regarding your cited 'poll'.

BY what authority does any majority party get the authority to release private information on anyone?

[whiskeypriest]

What on earth would Republicans be worried about?

Oh nothing. Nothing at all. In the immortal words of Kevin Bacon: All is well. Remain calm.

[LarryBnDC]

What on earth would Republicans be worried about?

Oh nothing. Nothing at all. In the immortal words of Kevin Bacon: All is well. Remain calm.

Or as David Huddleston said, “Never mind that shit! Here comes Mongo!”

https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/azeenghorayshi/trump-tower-moscow-the-secret-files-cohen-sater-putin

[barton]

Maison des Animaux.

Redweird, I agree with NA that this isn't really a 4th amendment issue.  When the President doesn't jettison his business enterprises, the public has every right to know if there are conflicts of interest.  I refer you to the Post article, which addressed this. 

Quite legal for House and Senate committees to request IRS information....When the "committee access" provision became law in 1924, Congress had been dealing with taxpayers' information in the Teapot Dome scandal.  Pretty obvious why there was a legitimate interest there.